Citizens take over the FCC: A conference (or at least a lunch)

Citizens take over the FCC: A conference (or at least a lunch)

: Here’s a conference I’d love to attend:

Citizens take over the FCC. All the constituencies who have problems with the FCC controlling what it shouldn’t control come together for a day and leave with a manifesto for change in the agency that oversees, regulates, and holds back the asset that belongs to all of us: spectrum.

Susan Crawford, David Isenberg, Om Malik, Kevin Werbach — and who else — know all about the technical and regulatory sides.

I’d take on censorship and free speech.

Susan Crawford put together a great conference on the FCC in New York a few weeks ago. It was way over my head, I’ll confess. It didn’t deal with the free speech issues. And its aim was different; it created dialogue with the FCC and that’s a good thing. David Isenberg has had some great gatherings that I unfortunately missed; they were, as I remember, more about freeing the network. Kevin Werbach has run big conferences in Supernova that explore various issues. So maybe I’m just late to the party.

But I see something that is, I think, simpler and, as a result, more radical:

Let’s look at what would happen if we abolished the FCC. What regulation, if anything, would we need instead? How are the FCC and Congress hurting development? We, the people, tell the FCC — and Congress — that spectrum is ours and we want to see it developed freely. We take control. We reset the starting point for the discussion.

: Well, fancy that: Just as I finished writing this post, I saw that Steve Verdon at Outside the Beltway also calls for abolishing the FCC (though he concentrates on free speech, not on the spectrum, network, and technology issues) . It’s a friggin groundswell. It’s a movement.

8 responses to “Citizens take over the FCC: A conference (or at least a lunch)”

  1. jackson Avatar

    Let the marketplace regulate itself like it’s suppose to, i.e. sponsorship, and use technology to inform viewers of potential content issues.

  2. MWB Avatar

    So three complaints to the FCC is “the tyranny of the few” but five anti-FCCers is a “friggin groundswell”.
    Full demagogue mode continues here at Buzzmachine.

  3. Grace Avatar

    Did the FCC missed Madonna (like a virgin)and Britney(I’m a virgin)when they were inhaling each other on National Television.
    I know that many young people, including kids wtach that show.
    If the FCC wants to prove that it is not an hypocite, let let start from the Madonna and Britney “sex show,” and leave people like Jany Jackson alone.

  4. Michael Avatar

    Grace – that was on MTV, outside the FCC’s authority.

  5. Don Mynack Avatar
    Don Mynack

    The FCC has many necessary regulatory functions besides the content end. It is absolutely necessary to ensure that broadcasters stay within proper frequency band, etc.
    Would not object to the broadcast networks self-regulating ala the MPAA rating system. However, I think one consequence we have to be aware of in abolishing the content fining authority of the FCC is the establishment of local censorship boards to take its place. Seems the networks better get their acts together now to fend off such a possibility.

  6. praktike Avatar

    Jeff, with all due respect, the idea of citizens taking over the FCC is a terrible one. It’s exactly what you _don’t_ want. James Dobson is way more powerful than you are.

  7. om Avatar

    Count me in Jeff, though with some different ideas.

  8. Kevin Werbach Avatar

    You’re late to the party indeed, my friend. Peter Huber published a whole book proposing the dissolution of the FCC in 1997, and he was hardly the first.
    I completely agree with you that the recent indecency jihad is awful. But what do you do about the other side of the equation: the free spectrum the broadcasters received, and their other regulatory advantages like mandatory retransmission on cable and satellite?
    Just the digital TV spectrum was estimated to be worth $70 billion eight years ago, but the broadcasters (unlike wireless carriers) got it for nothing. And without must-carry (which is mandated by the FCC), broadcasters could lose the 85% of their audience which doesn’t receive their signals over the air.
    If broadcasters are just another industry — and I agree that they are — we should treat them that way. Give them free rein over content, like other commercial speakers, but don’t give them corporate welfare and special protection against competition.